-----Original Message-----
From: MICHAEL.FULFORD.HD2O@statefarm.com
[SMTP:MICHAEL.FULFORD.HD2O@statefarm.com]
Sent: Monday, February 08, 1999 1:16 PM To: virus@lucifer.com Subject: Re: virus: 'Faith' in science.
On 2/8/99 11:05, MICHAEL.FULFORD.HD2O@statefarm.com said this-
>Is there any fundamental difference between this example and a religious
>person who reads the bible and accepts it as truth?
One difference has just occurred to me - A Bible reader wants to believe. A scientific reader has no desire to believe either way - just sides with the side with the best evidence. No Bible reader can read the Bible then say "Based on objective evidence the Bible is true"
Bill Roh
Yes, there is. Now, it's your job to tell me, since I do not want to hear a ventriloquist.
morbius@channel1.com
wade_smith@harvard.edu
**************************************
Well, all puppetry aside, I'm not exactly sure that there is a
difference--in
the example I gave. If a Christian has a goal of defending creationism and
quotes the bible or another apologetic source then he himself is just
propogating another's work or theory. When an atheist does the same (a la'
"If
you want to defend evolution, buy The Blind Watchmaker"), he is being no
more
"rational", "logical" or "scientific" than our religious friend. He is
simply
buying into and blindly following current, popular scientific thought.
I often hear the argument from evolutionary types; "Have you ever seen
God";
the same argument can be applied to atheists; "Have you ever seen a double
helix?"; "Have you ever seen Darwin"? To the former question--few, the
latter--NOBODY.
I don't think the proverbial "proof" is always in the pudding.
Tag, you're it!
Michael Fulford
Devil's Advocate